In this episode of Sext-Files: mining FBI databases for dirt on "hot" celebrities.

Though FBI agents are held to a high standard of conduct, some fall short—far short. Take, for instance, an incident in 2007 when an FBI employee "drove past a felony traffic stop, yelled 'Rodney King' out his car window and momentarily lost control of his vehicle, swerving into the oncoming lane and almost striking a police officer," according an account of an internal FBI investigation. (When cops pulled him over, the employee claimed he had yelled, "Geeze Louise.")

Thanks to the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), which rounds up accounts of these infractions and distributes the cautionary tales to employees each quarter, we get glimpses of the seedier side of life inside the agency. CNN has obtained a recent set of these memos (after obtaining earlier ones last year) that show employees sexting, breaking e-readers, viewing pornography in the office, improperly accessing databases, and even shoplifting "two ties from a local retailer."

Given the FBI's size, the number of such infractions is quite low, and the OPR investigations are encouraging. Still, they serve as a reminder of the need to watch the watchers. Here are some of the most intriguing technology-related offenses from FBI personnel over the last five years.

"During argument with spouse, Employee broke spouse's e-reader in half and pointed unloaded gun at dog's head while dog was sitting in spouse's lap." The OPR report notes that the use of a handgun was "an extraordinarily serious escalation" of the situation.

"Employee had a recording device in supervisor's office. In addition, without authorization, Employee made copies of supervisor's negative comments about Employee that Employee located by conducting an unauthorized search of the supervisor's office and briefcase." The employee in question then turned this information over to a lawyer and lied about the whole thing during an internal investigation. The employee was subsequently dismissed.

"Employee destroyed or hid electronic surveillance (ELSUR) evidence instead of properly processing it. An enormous backlog of unprocessed evidentiary material accumulated over several years. When questioned about it, Employee repeatedly lied to supervisors and hid/destroyed the unprocessed tapes." The mishandling "negatively impacted investigations" and led to the employee's dismissal.

"An employee failed to properly identify and secure materials on a thumb drive related to a child pornography investigation. As a result, the material was inadvertently viewed by other FBI employees."

"An employee used FBI equipment to view pornographic movies in the office while sexually satisfying himself. In aggravation, the employee was a supervisor."

Database dives

An entire class of bad behavior concerns unauthorized usage of the FBI's vast databases. In a January 2013 internal e-mail, OPR said it had found only one recent case where an employee "made unauthorized use of FBI database to search for information about friends and coworkers"; that person was suspended for five days.

This is pretty tame stuff compared to past infractions. In late 2007, for instance, an employee was found to have "conducted more than 1,500 unauthorized FBI database searches" and to have shared some of that material with people outside the agency.

In early 2008, an FBI employee "searched FBI databases for information on public celebrities the employee thought were 'hot.' The employee also conducted NCIC searches on two employees' boyfriends and shared the results with those employees."

In late 2010, an employee was found to have "misused government database [sic] to conduct name checks on to friends who were foreign nationals employed as exotic dancers. Employee also failed to report his contact with foreign nationals and brought the two friends into FBI space after hours without proper authorization." And lest you think the employee was some intern who may not have known the rules, the report notes that the employee had already served a suspension for misusing a government database and was currently "in a leadership position at the time of this offense."

Smart phones, dumb people

Smartphones have created a new series of opportunities for humans to do stupid things involving naked bodies and cameras, and FBI employees are not immune to the siren song of sexting.

"Employee e-mailed nude photograph of herself to ex-boyfriend's wife," says the report on one of the oddest incidents. "Ex-boyfriend and wife reported the incident to the local police. Employee failed to cease contact with ex-boyfriend and wife after twice being ordered to do so by supervisor and Chief Security Officer." The sexting employee was "suffering from depression related to break-up" and was suspended for 10 days.

Another employee used a personal cell phone "to send nude photographs of self to several other employees. In aggravation, Employee's conduct created office gossip and negatively impacted office operations." Indeed, the pictures were enough to affect "the daily activities of several squads."

Finally, one employee used a government BlackBerry to send sexually explicit messages to another employee and did so repeatedly, intentionally, and "during work hours."

Cannot say I am surprised. Hypocrisy runs through all levels of government, not just the higher-elected officials like Congressmen or Presidents.

Maybe so, but the takeaway from this article isn't so much "government is full of hypocrisy" as it is "any organization run by people is subject to the temptations of greed and corruption".

The thing to remember is that just as one pirate doesn't speak for all the users of a software application, just as one member of Anonymous doesn't speak for all of them, just as one xyz member of XYZ-with-shared-trait doesn't speak for all of them, don't extrapolate too hard.

It is interesting though to see some of the stuff that comes out of these investigations though.

I'm not especially concerned with FBI employees committing crimes unrelated to their jobs - that's no worse than anyone else committing those crimes. The real issue is when they commit crimes related to their jobs, either by violating people's rights or abusing their authority. For example, unauthorized access of databases is potentially very troubling.

You neglected to report some of the statistics that CNN provides: 1,045 disciplinary cases between 2010 and 2012 for 36,000 employees. Any abuse of power or the taxpayer's dollar is too much, of course, but those numbers are pretty small for an organization of that size. Ars' headline is less sensational than CNN's "FBI battling rash of sexting" though.

Sex related misconduct is one of the few kinds misconduct which is aggressively investigated and for which disciplinary action is taken yet it has some of the least effect on the public that these officers serve.

Sex related misconduct is one of the few kinds misconduct which is aggressively investigated and for which disciplinary action is taken yet it has some of the least effect on the public that these officers serve.

The FBI, and the government and law enforcement in the US in general, is extremely conservative. Sex is something to be ashamed of.

Sex related misconduct is one of the few kinds misconduct which is aggressively investigated and for which disciplinary action is taken yet it has some of the least effect on the public that these officers serve.

Direct effect is minimal, but it can have a pretty serious effect on operations, which can have a significant indirect effect on the public they serve (by reducing their efficiency and effectiveness).

Not arguing with the general point, though, that enforcement seems to be out of proportion with even that indirect impact.

I'm not especially concerned with FBI employees committing crimes unrelated to their jobs - that's no worse than anyone else committing those crimes. The real issue is when they commit crimes related to their jobs, either by violating people's rights or abusing their authority. For example, unauthorized access of databases is potentially very troubling.

Exactly. And to be honest, sexting a co-worker (while certainly inappropriate) in no way rises to the levels of other potential violations of a citizens rights. And that really brings up a good point: Where are those cases? All kinds of sexting, inappropriate office behavior, generally foolish stuff, but NOBODY had any SERIOUS violations which resulted in criminal charges? In an organization that big, I find that difficult to believe.

This is so typical in law enforcement that no one who has worked in or with law enforcement will be surprised. I once got a call asking if I had "borrowed" a brand new $1200 office chair from purchasing. (My office was across the hall.) I told them I hadn't been in the office yet today but I would "Keep an eye out for it." I left the courthouse and started walking back to my building and here was a deputy crossing the street rolling the brand new office chair. When I asked him about it he seriously answered: "But no one was using it!" When I explained that purchasing needed the chair returned so that they could return it to the vendor he got ticked. Then asked me if I thought he was stealing it. When I asked him what was the definition of taking something without permission he got really mad and yelled. "I'm a sheriff's deputy - it's not stealing!" That kind of attitude is endemic. Since they are doing the 'bad' thing and they are law enforcement, it can't be wrong.....

Cannot say I am surprised. Hypocrisy runs through all levels of government, not just the higher-elected officials like Congressmen or Presidents.

Maybe so, but the takeaway from this article isn't so much "government is full of hypocrisy" as it is "any organization run by people is subject to the temptations of greed and corruption".

The thing to remember is that just as one pirate doesn't speak for all the users of a software application, just as one member of Anonymous doesn't speak for all of them, just as one xyz member of XYZ-with-shared-trait doesn't speak for all of them, don't extrapolate too hard.

It is interesting though to see some of the stuff that comes out of these investigations though.

I totally agree with your sentiment but in some of these examples I would argue it's not even about "greed and corruption" so much as it is boredom, being stuck in rut, and doing something simply because you can.

Given human nature I don't think it's really surprising that people with access to interesting databases loaded with interesting info use them for other-than-work purposes. (This is, of course, the scary thing about compiling so much personal info on people in the first place)

The instances I find scary or those like the agent that became aggressive to his wife, broke her stuff and pointed a gun at her and the dog. That sort of mental break is serious and that person has no business operating as a law enforcement officer.

Things like looking up info on celebs should definitely be punished on principal but a little less worisome in my view.

Cannot say I am surprised. Hypocrisy runs through all levels of government, not just the higher-elected officials like Congressmen or Presidents.

Maybe so, but the takeaway from this article isn't so much "government is full of hypocrisy" as it is "any organization run by people is subject to the temptations of greed and corruption".

The thing to remember is that just as one pirate doesn't speak for all the users of a software application, just as one member of Anonymous doesn't speak for all of them, just as one xyz member of XYZ-with-shared-trait doesn't speak for all of them, don't extrapolate too hard.

It is interesting though to see some of the stuff that comes out of these investigations though.

I wasn't meaning the government is full of it, even if certain individual politicians are, but that even in what is meant to be a paragon of law enforcement, you have bad apples. More like, we can't expect to see the government behave itself the way it wants everyone else to behave.

This is so typical in law enforcement that no one who has worked in or with law enforcement will be surprised. I once got a call asking if I had "borrowed" a brand new $1200 office chair from purchasing. (My office was across the hall.) I told them I hadn't been in the office yet today but I would "Keep an eye out for it." I left the courthouse and started walking back to my building and here was a deputy crossing the street rolling the brand new office chair. When I asked him about it he seriously answered: "But no one was using it!" When I explained that purchasing needed the chair returned so that they could return it to the vendor he got ticked. Then asked me if I thought he was stealing it. When I asked him what was the definition of taking something without permission he got really mad and yelled. "I'm a sheriff's deputy - it's not stealing!" That kind of attitude is endemic. Since they are doing the 'bad' thing and they are law enforcement, it can't be wrong.....

Who is watching the watchers? I gave a talk once with cops that brought up legalizing some drugs. I mentioned how it would remove the temptation for cops to abuse the system. They looked at me like I was growing horns out of my head.

They have access and means to do bad things. Not all will take advantage of it, but some will. Maybe it is a little gray area. Maybe it was going to be a one time thing. Maybe they are just going to look up their daughter's boyfriend. Maybe they will just look up that cute girl that drove by; "Did she wink at me and smile? Maybe I should cruise her neighborhood a few times to make sure she is safe." Maybe they bust someone with an once or two of pot. They will let him off this time and just confiscate it. And somehow it doesn't make it back to the post. Maybe that black guy driving a beater car, after running his plate you see he is from the wrong side of town. Wouldn't it be a good idea to pull him over and question why he is over here.... for 3 hours.

Go ahead and say this doesn't happen. I have a dozen black friends that will tell you how they never drive over the speed limit, have a headlight or taillight out, or noisy muffler to avoid giving cops an excuse to pull you over and have to deal with cops looking for a reason to give you trouble.

This is so typical in law enforcement that no one who has worked in or with law enforcement will be surprised. I once got a call asking if I had "borrowed" a brand new $1200 office chair from purchasing. (My office was across the hall.) I told them I hadn't been in the office yet today but I would "Keep an eye out for it." I left the courthouse and started walking back to my building and here was a deputy crossing the street rolling the brand new office chair. When I asked him about it he seriously answered: "But no one was using it!" When I explained that purchasing needed the chair returned so that they could return it to the vendor he got ticked. Then asked me if I thought he was stealing it. When I asked him what was the definition of taking something without permission he got really mad and yelled. "I'm a sheriff's deputy - it's not stealing!" That kind of attitude is endemic. Since they are doing the 'bad' thing and they are law enforcement, it can't be wrong.....

Who is watching the watchers? I gave a talk once with cops that brought up legalizing some drugs. I mentioned how it would remove the temptation for cops to abuse the system. They looked at me like I was growing horns out of my head.

They have access and means to do bad things. Not all will take advantage of it, but some will. Maybe it is a little gray area. Maybe it was going to be a one time thing. Maybe they are just going to look up their daughter's boyfriend. Maybe they will just look up that cute girl that drove by; "Did she wink at me and smile? Maybe I should cruise her neighborhood a few times to make sure she is safe." Maybe they bust someone with an once or two of pot. They will let him off this time and just confiscate it. And somehow it doesn't make it back to the post. Maybe that black guy driving a beater car, after running his plate you see he is from the wrong side of town. Wouldn't it be a good idea to pull him over and question why he is over here.... for 3 hours.

Go ahead and say this doesn't happen. I have a dozen black friends that will tell you how they never drive over the speed limit, have a headlight or taillight out, or noisy muffler to avoid giving cops an excuse to pull you over and have to deal with cops looking for a reason to give you trouble.

Gee, have the cops ever pulled drugs from the evidence locker to plant on someone they are sure is a criminal? ;-) Yet another reason to oppose drug laws.

One night I spotted a patrol car hiding in the bushes. I took a turn very carefully so I wouldn't give the officer a chance to stop me. Well on went the red lights. I was stopped for taking the turn too slowly. I asked why I was stopped. The officer siad he was sure I was a drunk and overcompensating by driving slowly. He was rather pissed when he determined I wasn't drunk or under the influence of drugs (using the flashlight in the eyes test.)

Sex related misconduct is one of the few kinds misconduct which is aggressively investigated and for which disciplinary action is taken yet it has some of the least effect on the public that these officers serve.

The FBI, and the government and law enforcement in the US in general, is extremely conservative. Sex is something to be ashamed of.

Especially if you are the head of FBI and so deep in the closet you are in the sub-basement.

I'm not especially concerned with FBI employees committing crimes unrelated to their jobs - that's no worse than anyone else committing those crimes. The real issue is when they commit crimes related to their jobs, either by violating people's rights or abusing their authority. For example, unauthorized access of databases is potentially very troubling.

It's also weird, because your security officer can and will do background checks on people you're involved with regularly upon request.

The one that's really concerning is the non-disclosure of an ongoing relationship with foreign nationals. That's a big red light.

"An employee had a sexual relationship with a source, including liasons in a Bureau vehicle. The employee also lacked candor under oath when questioned during the administrative inquiry. In aggravation, the employee engaged in multiple sexual encounters with the source and this was the employee's second substantiated misuse of a government vehicle." Penalty: Dismissal